Finnish parliamentary election – April 19th 2015

[EPG]

Thanks to Helsinkian. I like Finland, it's a nice country.

Can you tell me, why are Finnish parliamentary majorities so big? Why do small parties join governments when they lack decisive influence over their survival, and why do big parties happily share the spoils?

What's the mood of the people like in Finland these days? Unemployment seems to be getting worse.

[EPG]

Any non-Centre Party based coalition possibilities?

Not that I see any, but it would make the election more interesting.

I am sure that if the government does well, the Green League could rejoin them to keep the Centre out.

God be with the olden days, when any combination of parties with over 100 seats would have been a potential coalition, regardless of ideology, except of course the National Coalition.

[EPG]

Totally wrong.

Before 1935 the governments were based on right wing parties (winners of the Civil War).
Thereafter the almost only possibility was Centre - SDP  coalition untill 1987. Sometimes it was added with Communists (called popular front) sometimes it was combined National Coalition Party (in fiftties) and few times either Centre or SDP were able to have minority government.
Actually there were one centre right majority government before left won significantly 1966.
It must be remembered that Centre shared ideas of universal wellfare state with Commies meaning that there were possibilty to .
Actually only since 1987 there have been rainbow coalitions (coalitions whitout Centre) since eternities.

No, I think I am right. Almost half the time, from 45-87, Finland had four-party government. The next most common option was five-party government. Four parties spent most of the time in government, including agrarians, anti-bourgeois social democrats and frequently-bourgeois Swedish speakers. The governments included communists, middle-class liberals, Swedish-speakers, and sometimes all three. These are all very unusual phenomena for European countries in the cold war (replace Swedish speakers with minority of choice), and of course the reason is the general tendency to exclude the National Coalition Party in favour of smaller parties. These parties didn't all share the same ideology just because they shared a government together - that is the fallacy of begging the question.

[EPG]

It's hard to think of a government that doesn't eventually gain a reputation for being out-of-touch. People like to think that there are good solutions that make them personally better-off but the government doesn't care.

[EPG]

It's hard to think of a government that doesn't eventually gain a reputation for being out-of-touch. People like to think that there are good solutions that make them personally better-off but the government doesn't care.

Maybe, but there is a reason Conservative parties are especially prone to aquire  such a reputation.

I don't know. I am sure French people say the same thing about Hollande; Americans say it about Obama. I wonder do Danes think it about Thorning-Schmidt?